MINUTES OF THE
SENATE Committee on Human Resources and Facilities
Seventy-First Session
March 2, 2001
The Senate Committee on Human Resources and Facilitieswas called to order by Chairman Raymond D. Rawson, at 11:19 p.m., on Friday, March 2, 2001, in Room 2135 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada. Exhibit A is the Agenda. Exhibit B is the Attendance Roster. All exhibits are available and on file at the Research Library of the Legislative Counsel Bureau.
COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT:
Senator Raymond D. Rawson, Chairman
Senator Maurice Washington, Vice Chairman
Senator Randolph J. Townsend
Senator Mark Amodei
Senator Bernice Mathews
Senator Michael Schneider
Senator Valerie Wiener
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:
H. Pepper Sturm, Committee Policy Analyst
Patricia Di Domenico, Committee Secretary
OTHERS PRESENT:
Carolyn Bauer, Concerned Citizen
Janine Hansen, Lobbyist, Nevada Eagle Forum
Lucille Lusk, Lobbyist, Nevada Concerned Citizens
Jeannie Simons, Concerned Citizen
D.L. “Dusty” Dickens, Director, Demographics, Zoning and Realty Department, Clark County School District
Raymond Bacon, Lobbyist, Nevada Manufacturers Association
Chairman Rawson opened the hearing on Senate Bill (S.B.) 149.
SENATE BILL 149: Authorizes parents of certain pupils to choose which public school pupils will attend. (BDR 34-10)
Senator Maurice E. Washington, Washoe County Senatorial District No. 2: Senate Bill 149 is a bill that authorizes parental choice to select a school for children. The existing variance system is a selective process and does not give everyone an equal opportunity. Senate Bill 149 affords the public a chance to attend a hearing for school selection. The school board will make the selection randomly based on the criterion that is set forth within the bill such as: grades, behavior, availability within that school, and the performance of the student. The school board is then to notify the various agencies, the student that has submitted the application, the public school the student plans to attend, the public school the student is requesting to leave, and the board of trustees of the school district in which the pupil resides, if the pupil will be attending a public school in an adjoining county. Appropriation for the student would follow that student to the school or the joining district. There is a deadline set within the bill and a legal opinion is needed to clarify the intent.
Chairman Rawson:
Senate Bill 149 does not have a fiscal note. Do you have an idea of the cost?
Senator Washington:
Currently, S.B. 149 does not require a fiscal note.
Senator Wiener:
I noticed on page 1, line 9, “Public school outside the zone of attendance that the pupil is otherwise required to attend if the board of trustees of a school district approves an application. ” Then, on page 2, lines 13 and 14, state “. . . school district shall approve all applications that are submitted. . .” I see ‘if’ as conditional and ‘shall’ as a mandate. Could you address that for me?
Senator Washington:
The language on page 1, line 9, means, it may be approved; it does not mean it shall or shall not be approved. Then, on page 2, line 13, there is a litany of requirements that must be met before the approval of the application.
Senator Wiener:
If the child was accepted and space had been available, under what conditions would space not be available?
Senator Washington:
A child that has applied, received the opportunity to attend the school of their choice and then in the succeeding year the space remains available they can continue to stay at that school. But, if enough space were not available for those students who are zoned to attend that school, then the child would have to revert back to its zoned school.
Chairman Rawson:
This really is an issue of growth and the needs of those who live in the area.
Senator Washington:
That is correct.
Senator Wiener:
How would the adjustments in terms of appropriation be determined if a child who was attending a school outside their zoned area returns to their zoned school during the school year, taking into consideration the count days?
Senator Washington:
The count days are usually done the second week after school starts and there would be an adjustment in the count for the student who is returning to the school in their zone.
H. Pepper Sturm, Committee Policy Analyst:
The school districts receive quarterly apportionments of the Distributive School Account (DSA). It would be picked up in the next quarter and then shifted back to the other school but it is not specified in S.B. 149.
Senator Washington:
Senator Wiener could offer an amendment to clarify that issue.
Senator Mathews:
How does this differ from a variance?
Senator Washington:
In the past a variance was very closed and a parent had difficulty applying for a variance. Senate Bill 149 opens it up to the general public. It gives the parent an opportunity to select a school of their choice.
Chairman Rawson:
This would be a standard rule if there is room in the school, whereas the variance is an exception.
Senator Mathews:
The process seems to be the same as a variance.
Senator Washington:
We are setting in statute the criterion by which the selection can be made.
Senator Mathews:
Does each district use the variance process differently?
Senator Wiener:
Each district has its own variance procedure.
Senator Mathews:
Would S.B. 149 clarify the procedure for all districts?
Senator Washington:
Some citizens have called me regarding school choice. They indicated the reason they purchased a home in a certain development is because they expected their children to go to a neighborhood school. Then due to rezoning they were told that their children would be bussed across town.
Carolyn Bauer, Concerned Citizen:
When my family lived in Reno we were five blocks west of the school boundary and I requested a variance for my four children to attend Sparks High School. I never had a problem until my fourth child was ready to attend the school then the variance was denied in writing. I was later told verbally the variance was accepted but I never received anything in writing. In addition, the school to which my child was zoned to attend was not given any information. I appealed the denial and the variance was accepted. This required time off from work to take care of the situation.
I support S.B. 149 because it would be of a general knowledge to the public. This would provide an acceptable procedure for parental choice. The student would have more study time if they were closer to the parent’s work or home. The parents will have a freer access to attend school conferences, take children to doctor appointments, or if children become ill. Children will be more motivated, therefore, their grades will be better, extra-curricular participation will improve; and they can be with there peers.
Initially I was told the reason for the variance denial was overcrowding, yet the appeal was eventually approved. The process was frustrating and cumbersome because all this had to be accomplish 6 months prior to the fall semester but Senate Bill 149 will bring it to within 3 months of the start of school.
Chairman Rawson:
With a general procedure there will be a better awareness and more people trying to transfer their children, therefore, it might be more difficult because of the competition. Would that be an issue?
Ms. Bauer:
That is a possibility, but I think it would be fair.
Janine Hansen, Lobbyist, Nevada Eagle Forum:
For the record, “I consider this bill to be for the children and for their parents.” Senate Bill 149 provides an opportunity for parents and children to meet their needs in a concrete way by providing the option to choose a public school and increase parental involvement. When people make their own choice they are more committed and they will become more involved. This is a bill for parental involvement as well as meeting the needs of the children. A parent might want their child to attend a different public school to have a different peer group and friends.
Senate Bill 149 will provide academic choice. Schools vary and a particular school may have a good program that would fit the academic or cultural needs of the child. The bill would provide options and convenience for children and their parents to make decisions. It would afford single parents the convenience and peace of mind to have their children close to home, work, or their caregivers.
Senate Bill 149 will motivate parents to be involved and students to achieve. I encourage you to pass this bill to provide these important options to meet the needs of children and their parents.
Lucille Lusk, Lobbyist, Nevada Concerned Citizens:
I would like to reiterate one point; when people have a choice in schools they feel ownership, will work harder, and have a commitment to the school. I ask the committee to look favorably upon this bill as public school choice.
Jeannie Simons, Concerned Citizen:
Our family chose the house we wanted, the area in which we wanted to live and the school we wanted our children to attend, but everyone does not have those options. This bill would benefit low-income families. I urge you to support S.B. 149.
D.L. “Dusty” Dickens, Director, Demographics, Zoning and Realty Department, Clark County School District:
I am here today to oppose S.B. 149. This bill creates a lottery system of granting zone variances without concern for the effect on grade level, ethnic diversity, and growth within an attendance zone during the school year, or continuation of students currently attending on zone variances.
The board of school trustees has 12 options in place to allow students and their families a choice. These options are approved with guidelines that allow families, the school district, and the community to plan for potential impact.
A document titled, “The Summary of Zone Variance Report By Grade Configuration 2000-2001” (Exhibit C), for the 250 schools in Clark County, indicates over 18,000 students attended schools other than those to which they were assigned by attendance zone.
“Clark County School District Policy” (Regulation 5112) (Exhibit D), is an extensive guideline written to take into consideration the ramifications of zone variance as they relate to desegregation, special programs, and over-crowded schools.
The lottery system of granting zone variances has potential issues associated with federal civil rights violations, and the requirement for a pupil on zone variance to maintain a minimum grade point average, would establish two different standards for students attending the same school.
I am providing the committee with a list of “Negative Impacts to a Lottery System of Granting Zone Variances” (Exhibit E), copies of Regulation 5112, a list of the “Clark Count School District Magnet Schools and Programs” (Exhibit F), a list of “Board Approved Options” (Exhibit G), and a document titled “Reasons for Which a Student May Attend a School Outside of the Attendance Zone” (Exhibit H). I urge you to oppose S.B. 149.
Chairman Rawson:
Are the programs in place primarily for high schools students?
Ms. Dickens:
We have options at every level: elementary and high school, and magnet programs for elementary, middle, and high school.
Chairman Rawson:
Ifwe had a lot of schools with surplus capacity then diversity might be a concern but with the growth of most of our districts there is little excess capacity in our schools. The size of the school limits the number of children that will be able to transfer out of a school. Have you looked at those numbers?
Ms. Dickens:
In the Clark County School District there are new schools opening at capacities that are lower than their maximum population. Because of the number of seats in a growing area where you have a large number of zone variances it would throw out of balance the ethnic diversity that was created through the zoning process.
Chairman Rawson:
Schools come into an area because there is a high growth rate and usually within a year those schools are full, then they start bussing children out of the district. The older schools are losing population and is that creating a problem for the district?
Ms. Dickens:
The older schools are the ones we would be concerned about in this situation because it is the newer schools that would receive the request for zone variance. The older schools where there is a high minority population would not have the advantage of the majority of students remaining and providing diversity to those schools. There is also a seating-capacity issue. Doing a lottery system of zone variances does not guarantee that the seats available at one grade level will be filled and there could be overcrowding at another grade level.
Chairman Rawson:
Senate Bill 149 deals with that issue.
Senator Washington:
The bill addresses the space issue. If there is not enough room then the student cannot attend. Senate Bill 149 also addresses the diversity issue by the requirements the student must meet. The bill will work, if given a chance.
Senate Bill 149 requires a student have a minimum grade point average. Does Clark County set a minimum grade point average (GPA) for students to participate in extra-curricular activities? If so, then the same GPA could apply to this bill.
Ms. Dickens:
I will get that information for you. I do see a difference between extra-curricular activity and the requirement of a grade point average on a zone variance. An extra-curricular activity takes time a student should be using for study.
In Clark County we are building new schools that requires a rezoning process. To many people change is difficult and often zone variances are requested as an opposition to the change itself. This creates a problem when establishing a new school because there may be a population far below what it should be.
In existing schools where there is high growth, we have a policy regulation set in place triggering schools year-round. The question that would need to be resolved is, are you in a year-round situation? If you fill all the seats in a 9-month school, are you filling it to capacity as a 9-month school, or are you actually triggering it to a year-round calendar. If you do trigger it to a year-round calendar it may have the opposite effect on the people who are requesting the zone variance because they may not want the zone variance any longer, so you will have a shifting of student population. The concern about the lottery process is, one grade could be overcrowded and other grades would have seats available.
Senator Wiener:
One of the issues that this bill addresses and the language is very clear is, ”no transportation will be provided.” In your document “Board Approved Options”(Exhibit G), it states, ”As of 3/5/96, transportation will no longer be provided,” this presents the situation of an inter-city child whose family does not have the commitment to the school and does not have the transportation to go elsewhere, therefore, this child does not have a choice.
Ms. Dickens:
I wouldpoint outa number of schools on the list are with transportation and many are inner-city schools. These generally are minority/majority options and are provided with transportation. Whether an option carries transportation is usually related to the specifics of the option itself.
Senator Washington:
Do you foresee this bill causing a mass exodus from inner-city to suburban schools?
Ms. Dickens:
I do not see a mass exodus from inner-city schools to schools in the newer developing areas. I would have concern for those children who require a zone variance because of family situations or hardships that could not be addressed through the lottery. A document titled, “The Negative Impacts of the Lottery System of Granting Zone Variances” (Exhibit E), addresses the impact on the current regulations and zone variance system by the Clark County School District.
Senator Washington:
How are students selected to participate in site-based education?
Ms. Dickens:
That determination is outlined in the “Clark County School District Policy,” Regulation 5112 (Exhibit D). A student could request a zone variance because of a change of family residence, day-care requirements, or other criteria listed in the policy and regulations.
Senator Washington:
In your document (Exhibit D), there is a statement on page 1, number 1, “orderly control of number,” which sounds like a random selection, first-come-first-serve, a lottery, if space is available, or whatever the criteria is set by the district. Why is that different from S.B. 149?
Ms. Dickens:
What is meant by space available and criteria is each school site may have specific programs in place that may not be at another school, or there may be seats available at one grade level but not at another, or sibling issues related to zone variances that a lottery could not address. Only those individuals that are at the school site can make the determination on those issues. There is a degree of subjectivity.
Senator Washington:
The process of zone variances is initiating change. What we are asking is that the process be more open and fair to those wishing to apply for a variance. There is a caveat of criterion that would be in place much like what is in statute presently. How do the various school districts handle this currently? And, why would S.B. 149 be different?
Ms. Dickens:
Look at the document titled “Reasons for Which a Student May Attend a School Outside of the Attendance Zone” (Exhibit H), and you will see the part titled, “Administrative Assignment.“ “The superintendent or their designee may assign a student either for special education, special language, or through written evidence that it is in the best educational interest of the student . . .,” but without seats available it is difficult to address this situation.
Senator Washington:
Do you have any opposition to parents making decisions or choices concerning their children’s education?
Ms. Dickens:
The Clark County School District, and I personally, agree that parents have to be involved in their children’s education. That is the reason we offer different options from which parents can choose for their children. For the Clark County School District it is not an issue of choice, we believe in choice, it is an issue of procedure and policy.
Chairman Rawson:
Do you interpret S.B. 149 as restricting the school board from using exceptions based on hardship? Would we need an amendment to clarify that issue?
Ms. Dickens:
The bill restricts it for some school districts, not all.
Chairman Rawson:
A possible amendment would be to clarify that the school board could supersede the lottery process for certain reasons.
Ms. Dickens:
I agree, and also change the date of granting zone variances. With the kind of growth and the 33 percent mobility rate there is in the Clark County School District, the May date would make it difficult. Many principals in Las Vegas will not grant variances until after the start of the school year so that they can see the seat availability.
Senator Washington:
Do teachers within a school district have an advantage or preference in being granted variances?
Ms. Dickens:
They have to go through the same process as anyone.
Raymond Bacon, Lobbyist, Nevada Manufacturers Association:
We support the general concept of public school choice. It is clearly a major step in the right direction, however, we are proposing two amendments to Senate Bill 149 (Exhibit I). The first amendment would be to require or strongly recommend the district selection rules favor students meeting the definition of “at risk.” Second, a new section that would require the districts to grant zone variances for any student that is in a “need of an academic improvement school.” Improving the situation for those people that are in high-risk situations is in the best interest of the entire state.
(At the request of Steve Williams, School Planner and Governmental Affairs Representative for the Washoe County School District, a document titled, “Remarks by Washoe County School District Regarding S.B. 149“ and “School Attendance Zones” (Exhibit J. Original is on file in the Research Library), was submitted for the record.)
Chairman Rawson
I nowclose the hearing on S.B. 149, and adjourn the meeting at 12:13 p.m.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
Patricia Di Domenico
Committee Secretary
APPROVED BY:
Senator Raymond D. Rawson, Chairman
DATE: